F.A. No. 221 of 2013. Case: Varun Motors Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Dr. D. Rajendra. Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case NumberF.A. No. 221 of 2013
Party NameVarun Motors Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Dr. D. Rajendra
CounselFor Appellant: M/s. Indus Law Firm and For Respondents: Mr. B. Appa Rao, Advocate
JudgesR. Lakshminarasimha Rao and Thota Ashok Kumar, Members
IssueConsumer Law
CitationI (2014) CPJ 269 (AP)
Judgement DateFebruary 17, 2014
CourtAndhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Order:

R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member

  1. The opposite parties are the appellants. The brief facts of the complaint are that the respondent booked Sovereign Blue colour Maruti Dzire LDi with the opposite parties by paying booking amount of Rs. 15,000. The appellant No. 2 issued quotation for Rs. 6,17,896 with a condition that the appellants should deliver the car within 45 days from the date of order. The appellants agreed to receive the used Maruti Wag RLX AP30E2457 of the respondent on exchange basis and the car was valued at Rs. 1,75,000 which was credited the amount to their account towards part consideration of the new car and issued credit note on the same day. Subsequently the respondent approached the appellants with balance amount several times and requested them to deliver the car. The appellants postponed to deliver the car of his choice on one pretext or the other. The appellants had to deliver the new car on or before 4.9.2009. The respondent being a doctor has suffered inconvenience from 28.7.2009 to 29.10.2009 due to non-delivery of car by the appellants. The respondent submitted that he refused to receive Silky Silver colour Maurti Dzire LDi car on 29.10.2009 as the delivery of the car was being delayed and colour of the car was also not in accordance with the order placed by him. On being threatened by the employees of the appellant that if he does not take delivery of the car, the advance amount paid by him will be forfeited to the appellants, the respondent accepted delivery of the car on 29.10.2009. The car was hypothecated to the State Bank of India, Rajam Branch.

  2. The respondent submitted that he suffered untold mental agony and damage due to delay in delivery of the car and he got issued notice on 2.12.2009 to the first appellant with a demand for damages to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000. The appellants failed to give reply to the notice. The appellants violated the terms and conditions of quotation and order form dated 11.7.2009.

  3. The appellants resisted the claim on the premise that the respondent placed order with the second appellant on 11.7.2009 by making payment of Rs. 15,000 as advance and the second appellant issued quotation dated 11.7.2009 for Rs. 6,17,896 with a condition that the appellants should deliver the car within 45 days from the date of the order. The appellants agreed to receive Maruti Wagnor LX AP30E2457 of the respondent on exchange basis and that the respondent delivered his car to the appellant No. 2 on 28.7.2009. The value of the car of the respondent was assessed at Rs. 1,75,000 and the amount was credited to the account of the respondent towards part sale consideration of the new car.

  4. The appellants submitted that they issued credit note dated 28.7.2009 to the respondent as also receipt acknowledging receipt of the amount of Rs. 15,000 towards advance amount and...

To continue reading

Request your trial